We are a year further down the track than Carlton, our game style is the same as Carlton, we’ve had an internal & external review, no president a new CEO that’s probably having second thoughts (don’t blame him) & yet it looks like Goodwin will see out his contract

He really needs to be gone at seasons end, the message & game plan ain’t getting through

3 hours ago, demoniac said:

Aha, so its ok that in the finals 3 rounds we can't beat teams that will be playing finals. Very low bar that.

Well they've been pretty tolerant towards the garbage we've mostly dished up since the West Coast Harley Reid game of round 10 last year so I don't see them going all judgmental all of a sudden if we go 0-3 against teams fighting for top 4 in the final weeks of the season.

1 hour ago, Young Blood said:

Which is why they're giving him a chance to adapt the game plan/style with what appears to be a fairly obvious timeframe/KPI's.

I don't like it necessarily but they'll give him the rest of this season and next to really implement the changes, which has been pretty obviously indicated. Its been noted by many that swinging larger gameplans changes especially dramatically offense wise isn't something you can suddently fix or get right in a single off season (yes yes should have happened earlier) so we've been commended by decent media heads for adapting/learning the new faster gameplan on the fly which is working in patches.

Seems like the playing group still trusts and respects him so they're not going to blow it up for the sake of it just yet.

Whether we like it or not he's not going anywhere anytime soon. But fine with people venting about it as the ol tradition when its not going great.

I still feel like our fitness is the concern with us dropping off in games more then we used to with energy/effort. That was always our staple over the last four or so years.

1st qtr on Saturday didn’t reflect that.

Again... says a lot about that review.

We woz robbed !!!

Why are posters suggesting the incoming CEO may have second thoughts? Not everyone has a loser mentality and wants an easy ride. He’ll want the gig because it’s tough, because we’re struggling, so he can assist build the club back up.

To do nothing in the 1st then put in after that says we can when we can be bothered.

I think after 9 years the players have had enough of the manager, it happens to even the best coaches, who hasn’t had a long term manager, who has thought, I am sick and tired of listening to the [censored] clown.

Goodwin has always had his favourites, he’s played guys when they are out of form, rushes them back from injury, that’s why all our depth has left since the flag, they weren’t getting a fair crack at senior footy.

The message and game plan is old news, a new voice is needed, that was evident last year, this year has just confirmed it for the Goody defendants. We need to make a move and make it this year otherwise we’re in a deeper hole when Max, May and Melky don’t have the motivation to go around again, Pendles and Sidebottom were written off as too old before Fly was employed.

Dare to dream and take a chance MFC, we’re only 3 spots off 18, it can’t get much worse, but it could get a hell of a lot better….

6 hours ago, GS_1905 said:

I think the boardroom is also partially to blame. Pert and Roffney did win us a flag, but clearly lacked the leadership and resolve to get us through the turbulence we faced in the last 2-3 years. Maybe nobody in the industry has/had the foresight to navigate that.

Whats not really discussed in public is the absolute rotten luck we got with Clarry, Gus and Trac all being dealt really significant blows. Our engine room full of a-graders were bought to its knees. There is really no contingency to prepare you for that. We needed some stability, and the timing of Goody's re-signing came at the worst possible time. The reality is we probably signed him up for 1 year too long.

The other aspect to this - again something that Goody takes an absolute bashing for - is our recruitment and development. This was all set in motion with Roosy and PJ. The inside, contested game. Remember we wanted a list that was built for finals football and when the rebuild kicked off back then, it was about contest. Even to this day, contest is a fundamental of all good sides, its what comes post-contest that we lack in. We overinvested in the contest and stoppage. This was further exposed with the retirement of Gus, who was a good outside player and fall from grace of Salem, who was the other weapon off half-back. Just about everything that could go wrong, did.

Goody has changed the gameplan - our ball movement is aligned to the modern way but our execution is letting us down. Bottom line is we wont succeed with the list that we have. Im sure everybody within the club is more than aware of this. We have to make some really hard calls (as does Carlton), which will determine how long we are stuck in this rut.

Bottom line: Sacking Goody now or next year will not make up for the deficit in our list profile. He will get us playing the right way, but want be able to teach the 'old dogs, new tricks'.

The inside contested game is purely the result of the Goodwin, Mahoney, Viney ( snr ) and McCartney .

3 hours ago, Ethan Tremblay said:

Why are posters suggesting the incoming CEO may have second thoughts? Not everyone has a loser mentality and wants an easy ride. He’ll want the gig because it’s tough, because we’re struggling, so he can assist build the club back up.

He’ll also get well paid

18 minutes ago, BDA said:

He’ll also get well paid

True. But could definitely earn more outside of being a CEO of an AFL club.

Edited Tuesday at 12:132 days by Ethan Tremblay

8 hours ago, Young Blood said:

Which is why they're giving him a chance to adapt the game plan/style with what appears to be a fairly obvious timeframe/KPI's.

I don't like it necessarily but they'll give him the rest of this season and next to really implement the changes, which has been pretty obviously indicated. Its been noted by many that swinging larger gameplans changes especially dramatically offense wise isn't something you can suddently fix or get right in a single off season (yes yes should have happened earlier) so we've been commended by decent media heads for adapting/learning the new faster gameplan on the fly which is working in patches.

Seems like the playing group still trusts and respects him so they're not going to blow it up for the sake of it just yet.

Whether we like it or not he's not going anywhere anytime soon. But fine with people venting about it as the ol tradition when its not going great.

I still feel like our fitness is the concern with us dropping off in games more then we used to with energy/effort. That was always our staple over the last four or so years.

If the board was actually giving Goodwin the chance to adapt the game plan over this year and next, then why wouldn't they say it? Have they said it anywhere? am I missing something?

Many people on this very forum said we would bounce back this year and that last year was the aberration. Trading out our future 1st round picks and refusing to trade anyone of currency in the last trade period tells me the club believed it could compete this season. Yet, we are worse than last year, and everyone is another year older.

If you're right, it's a major [censored] up. We have lost thousands of membership renewals, back to low crowds, and have lost many of our PT slots due to the poor form.

Goodwin knows this is a result industry. He was lucky he survived until 21. 21 he did the thing, he got the result. Now he should know rounding out from the 4th season following the flag with nothing but back to back straight set exits and 2 bottom 6 finishes that his job is gone.

16 hours ago, Billy said:

Pickett genuinely interested in your thoughts regarding what we do with Clarry

I like you have been his No1 &No2 fan of him & rate him when at his prime as one of our best ever

Don’t know where it goes from here?

Needs to fine down and do a summer of pro running to get back some explosiveness out of the contest.I also believe he has been overcoached to the degree that what was once instinctive is now second guesswork leading to sloppiness. Play him midfield still but part of a deep forward rotation and see if he could become a dangerous forward!

15 hours ago, Sir Why You Little said:

I don’t know all the answers mate, but the difference between the Top Clubs and the rest is mostly psychological.

It could be. I'm not convinced, though.

I think the difference between the top clubs and the also-rans is their bottom 10 or 15 players.

Teams that make it to prelims have a group of extremely strong A-graders complemented by good B-graders and a group of dependable... 'role players', 'third tier' players, 'non-stars'... call them what you want who do enough. And when that dependability wanes (ideally in only a couple of players), they have solid replacements in the VFL ready to go.

Carlton is the gold standard in the opposite of this. Weitering, Cripps, De Koning and Curnow... spines don't get much better. And they have some pretty good players on the next rung down - McKay, Walsh, Cerra, Saad, etc. But the list falls off a cliff at about 12 or 15. You might argue that all players below a certain level are balancing on the precipice of 'good enough' and it's basically all psychological for them. I'm not so sure. I think there's a huge difference in the skill and overall quality of these not-first-picked players and mental toughness is just one of many many variables. The better teams simply have better players further down their list...

...and, of course, as others have said, many other factors come into play. Injury, coaching, little bits of good and bad luck, game trends, etc.

My huge concern with Melbourne is that we're not even in the also-rans category anymore because our A- and B-graders are either a little bit below their best (Petracca) or an absolute mile off it (Oliver, May, Fritsch, Lever, Rivers, Viney, Salem). And even if we were - Brisbane and Collingwood shows we're still capable of being competitive against good teams - the VFL cupboard is almost completely bare.

I like the all-above-the-head theory because it means there's a chance we can return to finals soon. Next year, maybe. I want it to be true. I just don't think it is. I think the problem is much more structural than psychological.

8 hours ago, The Taciturn Demon said:

It could be. I'm not convinced, though.

I think the difference between the top clubs and the also-rans is their bottom 10 or 15 players.

Teams that make it to prelims have a group of extremely strong A-graders complemented by good B-graders and a group of dependable... 'role players', 'third tier' players, 'non-stars'... call them what you want who do enough. And when that dependability wanes (ideally in only a couple of players), they have solid replacements in the VFL ready to go.

Carlton is the gold standard in the opposite of this. Weitering, Cripps, De Koning and Curnow... spines don't get much better. And they have some pretty good players on the next rung down - McKay, Walsh, Cerra, Saad, etc. But the list falls off a cliff at about 12 or 15. You might argue that all players below a certain level are balancing on the precipice of 'good enough' and it's basically all psychological for them. I'm not so sure. I think there's a huge difference in the skill and overall quality of these not-first-picked players and mental toughness is just one of many many variables. The better teams simply have better players further down their list...

...and, of course, as others have said, many other factors come into play. Injury, coaching, little bits of good and bad luck, game trends, etc.

My huge concern with Melbourne is that we're not even in the also-rans category anymore because our A- and B-graders are either a little bit below their best (Petracca) or an absolute mile off it (Oliver, May, Fritsch, Lever, Rivers, Viney, Salem). And even if we were - Brisbane and Collingwood shows we're still capable of being competitive against good teams - the VFL cupboard is almost completely bare.

I like the all-above-the-head theory because it means there's a chance we can return to finals soon. Next year, maybe. I want it to be true. I just don't think it is. I think the problem is much more structural than psychological.

I think it’s a combination of all of the above, but i seriously think psychology is the major factor between Top Sides and also rans.

All AFL Players are fit, some can push harder than others and then some can be pushed harder by a good coach to levels they didn’t think they could reach

Very fine line….

Goodwin will be the coach next year.

11 hours ago, picket fence said:

Needs to fine down and do a summer of pro running to get back some explosiveness out of the contest.I also believe he has been overcoached to the degree that what was once instinctive is now second guesswork leading to sloppiness. Play him midfield still but part of a deep forward rotation and see if he could become a dangerous forward!

He does appear to be overcoached. I think you can see that when he appears confused and often gives up rather easily. What would lead to that though? Is it the coaching team trying to do too much to allow him to get back to his best or has he lost trust of the coaching team and needs very specific instructions. i.e. playing that tagger role gave him some real specific instructions to give him purpose.

11 hours ago, picket fence said:

Needs to fine down and do a summer of pro running to get back some explosiveness out of the contest.I also believe he has been overcoached to the degree that what was once instinctive is now second guesswork leading to sloppiness. Play him midfield still but part of a deep forward rotation and see if he could become a dangerous forward!

This is not limited to Clarry either.

For a bunch of guys that are here because they are better than 99% of footballers in the country, you’ll likely never see a more second guessing bunch.

They are all mentally drained from the ‘system’ they have had to adhere to so strictly for the past few years

I think we are in the same boat as Carlton as in the message is not getting through from the head coach to perform.

There's a few examples of teams finishing near last and the following season firing again and we must as a club believe we can. But it seems very obvious to me that we need a change of head coach and a fresh message. Someone who can get the best out of our current list again. Which is exactly what McRae did with the Pies. Rebuilding is not an option.

I think winning the premiership has been detrimental to motivation. I remember the feeling well, the feeling of climbing Everest. Now it's done the allure isn't so special. Now we have 7-8 weeks of just turning up for nothing really.

Oh and spare me the whole destination club theories. We got all our good ones in before we won the premiership and a year or 2 after being a laughing stock. Goody was great at convincing players that we where in the right path for success soon and that's all you need to be, on the right path and players will come.

I think we need to move on from Simon Goodwin but that's not going to happen with placeholder President and CEO, and Alan Richardson as GM of Football on borrowed time. Goodwin will coach us in 2026 and IMO that's OK because he seems a well-liked, good character who has recognised that we need to evolve and has started the wheels in motion, so I think we not in a poisonous state that needs a fast antidote. Carlton has done MFC management a huge favour by absorbing all the media spotlight. - we're in a very similar position to them.

Steven Smith and Paul Guerra need to be working in the background to find Richo's replacement so that the three of them can start to make a proper assessment of the state of affairs and Goodwin's future. It may be that they decide he IS the guy to go forward with, I doubt it but I don't really know. I think his strength is his weakness - he's possibly too wedded to senior players who took us there in 2021.

Edited yesterday at 09:191 day by old55

On 01/07/2025 at 14:35, ElDiablo14 said:

Have we been consistent under Goodwin?

If you really dissect his tenure, it really feels like a roller coaster of highs and lows. Fun ride not gonna lie.

Hasn't been that thrilling really. A very teeny tiny rollercoaster.

I could do with a big mug of hope right now

On 01/07/2025 at 07:33, Adam The God said:

Some of this is fair, but your centrepiece of mental fatigue doesn't really hold given the amount of best 22 changes over the last 4 years. It's practically half the best 22, and it's the old players that are the ones butchering it and struggling to come to terms with the new way the team is trying to play.

It's more likely, as you imply, a multitude of factors at play, which @binman has always stressed.

Mental fatigue was listed, it was never a centrepiece. You've stated that it's a centrepiece.

I used it as an example of a factor that isn't talked about nearly enough around here due to the conversation being consistently steered in the 'loading' or the 'we're not fit enough' direction by a select few popular posters.

Mental fatigue absolutely holds given our core group have barely changed and that's where most of your output as a side comes from. And that's part of the issue.

And I also disagree re Binman always stressing that it's a multitude of factors. Perhaps more recently he's come around due to our now consistent and predictable shortcomings. But early days the main conversation and excuses for our performances were around 'loading, injury, not being fit enough'. Not list imbalance, skill execution and level being MAJOR issues, inability to adapt being a major issue, the consistency and predictability of losing the same way being a major issue. Which of course leads to mental fatigue, lower motivation levels, loss of confidence etc etc.

1 hour ago, Howard_Grimes said:

Mental fatigue was listed, it was never a centrepiece. You've stated that it's a centrepiece.

I used it as an example of a factor that isn't talked about nearly enough around here due to the conversation being consistently steered in the 'loading' or the 'we're not fit enough' direction by a select few popular posters.

Mental fatigue absolutely holds given our core group have barely changed and that's where most of your output as a side comes from. And that's part of the issue.

And I also disagree re Binman always stressing that it's a multitude of factors. Perhaps more recently he's come around due to our now consistent and predictable shortcomings. But early days the main conversation and excuses for our performances were around 'loading, injury, not being fit enough'. Not list imbalance, skill execution and level being MAJOR issues, inability to adapt being a major issue, the consistency and predictability of losing the same way being a major issue. Which of course leads to mental fatigue, lower motivation levels, loss of confidence etc etc.

Posters, myself included, talk about mental fatigue, but it's one of many factors, just as learning a new zonal system.

I noted on AFL360 while I was in the pub that we're the number ball movement team in the competition. It's a marked shift in the way we play.

IMV, not enough emphasis is placed on this shift in the way we're trying to play. This also explains teething issues, but I've outlined my position now on the rest of the season.

3 hours ago, GS_1905 said:

He does appear to be overcoached. I think you can see that when he appears confused and often gives up rather easily. What would lead to that though? Is it the coaching team trying to do too much to allow him to get back to his best or has he lost trust of the coaching team and needs very specific instructions. i.e. playing that tagger role gave him some real specific instructions to give him purpose.

He doesn't need ANY instruction.. mate see ball get ball and just DO what comes natural.... EASY!

Our strategy since Jackson left is a key area of our problems, Grundy failed, Fullerton hasn’t worked & Campbell hasn’t played a game, What’s JVR role confusion for the kid & impacting his development